Lawyer's Language: Home sweet home - JPost - Lifestyle

There's some helpful legal tips in the JPost today:

Lawyer's Language: Home sweet home - JPost - Lifestyle:

By CAROLINE WALSH 
11/22/2011 10:58 

Lawyer Caroline Walsh answers your questions about coping with the Israeli legal system.

Although many of us have a smattering or even a fairly good grasp of Hebrew for every-day purposes, when it comes to official documents it's almost impossible to make sense of these in a foreign language. If your mother- tongue is not Hebrew but you live or have interests in Israel, you may have accepted the fact you will be forced to sign documents in Hebrew which you don't understand – but is that wise? You don’t need a lawyer to tell you the answer is no and, more than that, it's often not really necessary. Did you know that you can get bank statements in English and that most of the Israeli banks can give you access to their on-line services in English as well?

When it comes to legally-binding documents, even more caution should be exercised. You should certainly not sign anything in Hebrew if you don't fully understand the contents or implications, especially if you have the option to sign in English.

Q: We are selling our apartment in Raanana and the buyers are also English speakers. Can we draw up the contract in English?

A: In most cases, yes. If the property you are selling is built on private land registered at the Land Registry and if the buyers are happy to have the contract drawn up in English, there is no reason why you should not do so. The sale contract does not have to be filed to transfer ownership, the deeds of sale are sufficient for this. These are standard one-page documents which your lawyer will prepare with details of the property and the transaction. You will need to submit the contract to the Registry to register a restriction in favor of the buyers, but most branches of the Land Registry (Tabu) accept documents in either Hebrew, Arabic or English. For the same reason, if you wish to sign a power of attorney authorizing your lawyer to act on your behalf in the sale, this can also be in English.

If the property is not registered at the Land Registry, or is not on private land, then you may need to have a contract in Hebrew. If so, your lawyer should provide you with a translation of the salient points. Alternatively, you could use a contract in English and have this translated and notarized. For example, although most properties in Raanana are privately owned, in areas such as Bet Shemesh the land is owned through the Israel Lands Authority which does not accept documents in English. In addition, if you are buying a new apartment which will not yet have been registered at the Land Registry, your lawyer will need to ask the developers whether they will accept documents in English. If not, in larger projects where there are several foreign buyers, the developers will often agree to have the paperwork translated for you.

Q: I own an apartment in Israel and have been told that I should have a second Will to cover only my Israeli property, but I don't speak Hebrew. Do you recommend having a separate Will and can it be in English?

A: A Will which is valid abroad will usually be valid in Israel but there are several reasons why you may wish to have a separate Will just for your Israeli property. Firstly, foreign probate orders are not recognized here in Israel and so your heirs will need to apply for a separate order here in Israel in any event. As foreign Wills are often lengthy and complex – for example, due to tax planning provisions - the Israeli courts are unlikely to accept these without requiring a notarized translation of the whole Will. You might also wish to appoint different executors to manage your estate here in Israel, particularly since the Israeli courts will not appoint non-resident executors. In addition, having a separate Will allows an application to be filed in Israel without waiting for procedures abroad to be completed.

If you do decide to draw up a separate Will for your Israeli property, I strongly recommend that is it drafted in English. It is vitally important that you understand exactly what you are signing. Since such Wills are usually simple and concise, the Israeli courts will often accept these in English without requiring a translation into Hebrew. Even if a Hebrew version is required at a later stage, a notarized translation can be prepared on the basis of your original will which will be accepted by all the relevant authorities.

An important reminder: If you do decide to draft a separate Will for your Israeli assets, you must make it clear that this does not revoke any other Wills you have for your property outside Israel.

This article is presented for your general information and does not constitute legal advice. You should obtain specific legal advice about your estate before taking (or deciding not to take) any action. Please contact Caroline for further information.© SaftWalsh 2011. All rights reserved.

Asher Grunis to be the Next President of the Supreme Court

Justice Grunis

The Knesset is on its way to passing a law- The Grunis Law- that will change the status quo at the Supreme Court of Israel. The current practice is that when the President of the Court retires at age 70, the next most senior Justice (based on age) becomes the new President, although I don't think that is codified in the law. (See here.) The Courts Law- 1984 provides that the President of the Supreme Court shall be appointed in accordance with Section 4(a) of the Basic Law: The Judiciary which states in turn that "A judge shall be appointed by the President of the State upon election by a Judges' Election Committee." Section 8(c) of the Courts Law states that "a judge may not be appointed to the position of President or Vice President of the Court if he/she cannot serve in this position for at least three years until mandatory retirement under section 13(a)(1)" which mandates that a judge retire at age 70.

The current President, Dorit Beinish, is set to retire in a few months. Justice Grunis, who would replace her, would only serve as President for 2 years and 10 months before turning 70, seemingly disqualifying him from the position. The Knesset's new law would waive the 3 year requirement and apparently not replace with any time requirement at all. According to the JPost the new law would apparently have a two year minimum service requirement, but I didn't see that on the Knesset website. What I read seemed to say that the nomination of a suitable President will be left to the discretion of the Committee.

While the sponsor of the bill Yaakov Katz said that his motivation is to ensure that the country doesn't lose out on a competent President like Justice Grunis because he is 41 days too old, it seems to be an open secret that the cancellation of the law is a political maneuver by Knesset members who approve of Justice Grunis' opposition to judicial activism and reticence to annul laws passed by the Knesset.

I actually worked for Justice Grunis at the Supreme Court last year when I was a foreign law clerk. See my previous post here. I liked him a lot and hope he does become the next President of the Court.

Relatedly, another law is under consideration that will change the makeup of the Election Committee which currently consists of 9 members. Section 4(b) of the Basic Law: The Judiciary currently states that "The Committee shall consist of nine members, namely, the President of the Supreme Court, two other judges of the Supreme Court elected by the body of judges thereof, the Minister of Justice and another Minister designated by the Government, two members of the Knesset elected by the Knesset and two representatives of the Bar Association elected by the National Council of the Chamber. The Minister of Justice shall be the chairman of the Committee." The new law will change the method for appointing the members of the Bar Association. The Chairman of the Bar Association will be one member and another member from the political opposition will be the other. See here.

I admit I don't understand how that will work. It assumes that the Chairman of the Bar Association belongs to a political party. What if he doesn't? Is that possible? Does it seem strange to you that the members of the Bar Association are openly political?

JPOST: Police recommend charging ex-head of Israeli Bar

I just saw this article from the JPost. It's never good when the head of the Bar Association is being charged with corruption.

I remember reading an article discussing whether the high rate of corruption in Israel is indicative of a rotting legal/political system or a strong press corps and government willingness to end corruption. Could it be both?

Police recommend charging ex-head of Israeli Bar

By YAAKOV LAPPIN 15/11/2011

Attorney Guy-Ron, senior Meuhedet Health Fund officials are suspected of fraud, corruption.

Police said evidence exists to charge senior officials from the Meuhedet Health Fund with corruption following the completion of an extensive investigation, and recommended that the former head of the Israel Bar Association, attorney Yuri Guy-Ron, also be charged in connection with the affair.

Guy-Ron, who owns a marketing company together with his wife, is suspected of receiving hundreds of thousands of shekels from Meuhedet without providing a  service in return. 

"We found evidence that Mr. Guy-Ron committed offenses [while head of the IBA] relating to corruption, conspiracy to commit a crime, and aggravated fraud," police said in an official statement.

The funds were sent to Guy-Ron's company by Yehuda Aliash, former deputy marketing director of the Meuhedet Health Fund. "The two men are friends. The transfer of large funds was not reciprocated by any service," a police source close to the investigation told The Jerusalem Post.

Responding to the allegations, Guy-Ron told Channel 2 News, "I received the news with surprise and shock. I can't understands the police's recommendation. The decision will rest with the prosecution, and I am convinced that it will find that I did not commit any offense."

The National Fraud Unit launched its inquiry following a report by the State Comptroller on the Meuhedet Health Fund, which raised concern over major irregularities.

Aliash is suspected diverting tens of millions of shekels from the advertising budgets towards marketing companies that employed his associates and relatives.

He is also suspected of paying bribes, money laundering, and fraud. "A basis of evidence exists to back up these suspicions," a police spokesman said on Tuesday.

Another suspect in the investigation is former Fund director-general Uzi Salant, who police suspect of illegally attempting to recruit new members to the fund. 

Police told state prosecutors on Tuesday that he too should be charged.

Israel Real Estate Law

Due to the housing shortage which was one of the causes of the widespread tent protests this past summer, the government has taken steps to encourage investors to sell their properties and to discourage them from buying more properties by increasing the purchase tax and eliminating the capital gains on sales of residential properties if it is not the seller's main residence.

The purchase tax rates are as follows: for a purchase price up to 1,350,000 NIS- 0%, 1,350,000 NIS to 1,601,210 NIS- 3.5%, above 1,601,210 NIS– 5%.

Under Section 49B of the Land Tax Law, the sale of a residential property may be eligible for an exemption from the capital gains tax if one of the following conditions are met:

1. the seller has not sold a tax-exempt property within the last 4 years (but starting January 1, 2013 until January 1, 2021, for the last 8 years;
2. the property being sold is the seller's only residential property in Israel and he has not sold a tax-exempt property within the last 18 months, and in the last 4 years he has not owned more than one residential property at a time.
3. a beneficiary of a relative's will (a parent, parent-in-law, or spouse) is entitled to the exemption if the deceased person would have been entitled to it were he still alive.

The law in effect now give sellers in the year 2011 an exemption on the capital gains tax for residential properties up to a value of 2.2 million shekels. And sellers can use this exemption up to two times in the calendar year.

Furthermore, the law also reduced the betterment tax imposed at the time of issuance of a building permit or the sale of properties whose value has risen due to changes in the rights or zoning of the property. The maximum rate was reduced from 45 to 20 percent.

For a Hebrew article on this, see here.

For an English article see here.

The Bar Gets Higher: Record Low Bar Passage Rate in Israel

News outlets are reporting that preliminary results show that only about 50% of those who took the Israeli Bar Exam last week successfully passed the test. (See the hebrew article at The Marker here.) The average score was a 64 out of 100, and the passing grade is a 65.

Is this the Bar Association's way of thinning the herd and dealing with the problem of too many lawyers?

Does an overly difficult exam violate students' basic right to freedom of occupation?

The students who took the exam are weighing their options, including appealing the fairness of some of the question, suing the Bar Association, and protesting.

There are other countries with harder exams. The bar passage rate last year in Japan was 25% and two law schools in that country reported that none of their graduates passed the exam. See the article from the ABA Journal here. And I've seen some people writing that Brazil's bar passage rate is even lower but I didn't see a reliable source for that claim.

Tips for Litigation Meetings with Clients: Answering a Complaint

I recently sat in a meeting with a client regarding ongoing litigation and noticed the gap that exists between lawyers and other professionals when a lawsuit is pending.

Imagine a client that is being sued for millions of dollars regarding a dispute about a construction project gone awry. The plaintiff's complaint is about 30 pages long with over 200 numbered paragraphs full of dollar amounts and references to hundreds of attached pages of exhibits. The client needs to prepare an answer to the plaintiff's complaint. He spent the first weeks/months gathering the information to respond to the complaint and now it needs to be organized and written up. But the client's project team is not composed of lawyers and they don't have experience with drafting answers to complaints. The clients have the information but the lawyers have the drafting experience. What the client needs is direction.

Tip #1: Break the complaint up into sections. Answering a complaint with hundreds of paragraphs could be overwhelming for a client. Like any other task, breaking it into smaller pieces should help. Usually there are natural section breaks in the complaint. The beginning of the complaint consists of general introductory facts about who the parties are and their relationship to one another. After that it gets more specific and if written well it will have headings for each claim with the supporting claims below. Walking a client through the different sections in the claim can make it less intimidating.

Israel Company Formation and Registration

The following is a translation from the instructions on the website of the Registrar of Companies of how to register a company in Israel:

In order to register a company in Israel, you must submit to the Registrar of Companies, the following documents:

1.       Company bylaws (Article 8 of the Companies Law)

A.     The bylaws shall include the following information (Article 18):

                                                                 i.      The company name - A company may register any name in accordance with paragraphs 26 to 31 of the Companies Law.

a.       If the name is invalid and must be changed, it cannot be changed by simply updating the bylaws.

Catch and Release- Israel Style

In a few hours the government of Israel is going to release the first batch of hundreds of convicted terrorists in exchange for captured soldier Gilad Shalit, with the release of hundreds more in a few days. Gilad Shalit's parents single-handedly waged a battle to get their son back. They did what any parent would do but it has been questioned whether the government was inordinately swayed by a vocal minority. But in fact, Israelis are generally supportive of the exchange. The most vocal opposition to the trade are the families of victims of terror attacks who don't want to see their loved ones' killers be released before serving their time. Needless to say, this is a complicated issue. I am most interested to hear from Gilad Shalit (when he is ready to talk about this whole episode) about whether he thinks the government did the right thing in agreeing to this exchange.
This reminds me of a review of the movie Saving Private Ryan by Mark Steyn:

Now Accepting Guest Bloggers

I am looking for Guest Bloggers to write articles about the Israeli law scene. Comparative analysis of Israeli law versus other systems especially Jewish law are most welcome, as well as in depth pieces on current issues before the courts. If you have something you'd like to post, please send me an email.

Thanks

2 Class Actions Against PelePhone Certified by District Court

The Tel Aviv District Court recently approved a class action lawsuit filed against cellular phone provider Pelephone for charging customers a fee of 85 NIS in order to unlock their phones for use with SIM cards from other providers. The complainant claimed that such fees were against the Communications Law and violated the terms of PelePhone operating license.

PelePhone argued that it did nothing wrong.

Another class action against PelePhone was also certified around the same time. This one had to do with PelePhone option for customers to pay for music to be played to callers to their numbers in place of a standard ring. Customers paid 6.93 NIS for the service. Before the music was played to callers, they heard a 5.6 second message saying, "Do you like this song? If so, press * two times and it will be sent to your cellphone, for a fee." The lawsuit claimed that PelePhone did not have the customers' permission to solicit these purchases on time that was ostensibly paid for by the customers for the transmission of music.The lawsuit claimed the PelePhone breached its agreement and was unjustly enriched on the backs of its customers.

PelePhone claimed that it provided discounted songs to customers and because of that benefit, the class action did not accurately represent all of its customers and was against their interests. Further they claimed that most of their customers knew about the messages and so implicitly agreed and furthermore, it was easy to cancel the service and the messages by speaking with a PelePhone representative.

The Court rejected PelePhone's claims saying that it was not clear that customers knew about the messages and that they could cancel the messages. The Court also rejected the argument that the service benefited customers because it was still a source of revenue for PelePhone and appears to be a breach of the contract. PelePhone used the paid-for time of its customers without their permission.

Both of those decisions only permit the class action to proceed; there will be further decisions about the substantive issues at a later date unless the parties reach a settlement. 

Rosh Hashana Bonus Pay

Besides the really cool desk calendar I saw in my Google Reader (pictured above), I saw some interesting labor law questions from datafax.co.il (although the website is not working for me.)

Since this year Rosh Hashana falls out on Thursday and Friday, most people have an extra day off from work (namely Thursday, because Friday is usually a day off anyway, see my earlier post on that here.)

Does a worker get paid for Thursday, even though it is a holiday?

A worker who gets paid monthly would still get his normal pay even though he is working one day less during the month. A worker who is paid a daily wage however will only get paid for Thursday if he has been employment at the same place for the last three months and as long as he works the day before and after (Sunday?) the holiday- unless he has permission to miss those days as well. If there is a collective bargaining agreement or other agreement, that may take precedence over these rules.

The Hours of Work and Rest Law states that a work day shall be no longer than 8 hours. (There are exceptions to this rule, of course.) On the day before a holiday, the work day shall be no longer than 7 hours.

Since this year, Yom Kippur falls on Shabbos, does a worker get paid for the holiday anyway?

No. I assume that since the worker never generally gets paid for Shabbos, he does not get holiday pay for this Shabbos.

I will hopefully add more to this page next week.

Have a happy, healthy, and sweet new year everyone!

Big News For Patients: Forgetting Your Magnetic Card at Home Will Not Result in a Denial of Health Services

The JPost had an article that contains an important change for many patients, especially new olim.

'Magnetic card not conditional for service at kupat cholim'  By Judy Siegel-Itzkovich

"Health fund members cannot be forced to show their magnetic cards when seeking basic medical services, medications or first aid, according to Health Ministry deputy director-general Dr. Yoel Lipschitz, who is supervisor of the public health insurers.

Instead, the health fund staffers can request another type of identity card, he said in a statement on Monday.

'For basic medical services, the health fund must not condition presentation of the magnetic card for making a medical appointment.

Appointments cannot be canceled or delayed as a result of not having the card or lead to patients having to wait for long period for an appointment', said Lipschitz."

Prime Minister Reports on President's Travels

Today's post is just a little quirky piece of Israeli law.

I recently saw a public notice in Reshumot, the official gazette for the publication of records and laws in Israel, that made me do a double take. It is a notice "signed" by the Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, notifying the public that the President, Shimon Peres, left the country for 3 days. That's all it says.

Apparently, according to the Basic Law: The President, the Prime Minister must notify us of the President's travels outside the country:

24.(b) The Prime Minister shall publish a notice in Reshumot as to the President's leaving the territory of the State and as to his return.

This is the notice in Hebrew:

הודעה על יציאת נשיא המדינה את גבולות המדינה ועל שובו

לפי חוק–יסוד: נשיא המדינה

בהתאם לסעיף 24(ב) לחוק–יסוד: נשיא המדינה , אני מודיע על יציאת נשיא המדינה את גבולות המדינה ביום ב' באלול התשע"א (1 בספטמבר 2011) ועל שובו ביום ה' באלול התשע"א (4 בספטמבר 2011).

י"ב באלול התשע"א (11 בספטמבר 2011) (חמ 3—1300)

בנימין נתניהו

ראש הממשלה

Now this notice was published on September 26, 2011 even though the President had already returned by September 4th. I guess we just need to be apprised of the President's travels but not for the purposes of knowing his itinerary.

I checked the President's website but didn't see any press release for those dates, so maybe it was a pleasure trip. If you live in another country and met with the President between September 1st and 4th, please let me know.

Netanyahu vows to lower prices with more competition

From JPost National News

By JPOST.COM STAFF

09/19/2011 13:05

PM blames concentration in economy for high cost of living; vows to take action to increase competition without hurting business.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Monday discussed plans to lower the cost of living in Israel, promising "less concentration and more competition."

The prime minister was joined by Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz and Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer in a press conference to present the interim findings of the Committee on Increasing Competitiveness in the Economy.

Netanyahu said that he had commissioned the report more than a year ago when he realized that despite a healthy economy, the cost of living in the country was rising.

The prime minister stated that "competition is not the enemy of the consumer," but rather a lack of competition in the market led to the high cost of goods.

He promised "fair competition" that would not hurt business owners who create jobs and lead the economy.

The committee did thorough and professional work in both studying the subject and giving real solutions. The committee's conclusions will lead to substantive changes in the Israeli economy and to the cancellation of the situation that has prevailed for decades, of involvement and major control by a few groups," Netanyahu stated. He also thanked Finance Ministry Director-General Haim Shani, who chaired the committee, outgoing Prime Minister's Office Director-General Eyal Gabai and all the other members of the committee.

Netanyahu stated that the committee's final report would be issued in three months and passed on to the Knesset.

These steps, along with those of the special committee that I appointed, chaired by Prof. Manuel Trajtenberg, will lead to a genuine revolution in the Israeli economy in favor of the consumer who is groaning under the illogical cost-of-living," he added.

Last month, the prime minister ordered the committee to speed up their work amid cost of living protests, saying the country's priorities were changing.

Israeli Woman Ordered to Pay 200,000 NIS in Damages for Refusing to Accept a Divorce

Israel always is torn between its identity as a modern democratic state and a Jewish/religious state. For example, there is no civil marriage or divorce; all marriage and divorce must go through the religious courts. While the more common scenario is that a husband refuses to grant his wife a divorce or gett and prevents her from getting remarried under Jewish law (such a woman is referred to as an aguna), an article in the JPost reported that in a strange twist, a family court judge recently ordered a woman to pay 25,000 NIS for each year she refused to accept a gett from her estranged husband.  While according to the Torah, a man may divorce his wife without her consent, that practice has been rabbinically proscribed since

"about one thousand years ago, [when] the famous Cherem (a decree under penalty of ban) of Rabbeinu Gershom was instituted, stating that a woman cannot be divorced without her consent. Thus, the 'playing field' was evened. As Rabbeinu Aher states in his famous dictum, 'The Rabbis acted to equalize the woman's power with the man's.' Now, for all practical purposes, neither side in a marital dispute is entitled to a Get unless there exist very specific grounds for one."

(From The New York State Get Bill and its Halachic Ramifications by Rabbi Chaim Malinowitz.)

Rabbi Malinowitz's article seems to say that coercion via a financial penalty imposed by a court on a recalcitrant wife (as well as on a husband) can invalidate the gett. But my understanding of that article is that if the Beit Din has already ruled that there are grounds for divorce and orders the wife to accept the gett then the coercive nature of the monetary fine is mitigated. For a technical discussion of the questions that a Beis Din poses to ensure the woman's consent see this article by Rabbi Chaim Jachter. ***Update: See this article about a man who was fined by the court for not giving his wife a gett. And this article about a law that is under consideration to expedite the process of fining recalcitrant husbands.***

Furthermore, because the prohibition against divorcing one's wife against her will is of rabbinic origin, there is an escape clause. A man can still divorce his wife against her will if he gets one hundred rabbis to agree to create an exception. This is called a Heter Meah Rabbanim. For an article on the misuse of that device see here. The policy of the Beit Din of America is: 

11. The Beth Din of America agrees that Heter Me'ah Rabbanim should be used only in extreme cases, such as severe and irreversible mental illness.

12. The Beth Din of America will not perform a Heter Me'ah Rabbanim without a hashlashas haget - a Get provided for the woman and held in escrow by the Beth Din to be delivered to the woman as soon as she is prepared to accept it. The Beth Din of America will not perform a Heter Me'ah Rabbanim when the woman is prepared to accept a Get.

13. The Beth Din of America believes strongly in the continuing force today of Cherem De'Rabbeinu Gershom which prohibits polygamy. The Beth Din will not permit a man to marry or to date other women  until he has delivered a Get to his wife.

Shocker: Israeli Lawyers Get Paid Less Than Their American Counterparts!!

Below is an infographic showing the salaries of lawyers and jurists in Israel, as of 2009.


The left side of the graphic describes different types of lawyers and the right side has the following statistics. Whereas a top Manhattan attorney can make $1,000/hr., a similar lawyer in Tel Aviv makes $275-600/hr. While a first-year attorney at a top firm in Manhattan makes 52,000 NIS a month ($15,250 at the rate of 3.41 shekels to the dollar), an experienced attorney at a top firm in Tel Aviv makes 40,000 NIS a month ($11,730), in the periphery of the country 11,000 NIS ($3,226), a first-year associate in Tel Aviv makes 16,500 NIS ($4,839) and in the periphery, 6500 NIS ($1,906).


In Israel, there are currently more than 40,000 lawyers making up 0.6% of the population. Most of them are Jewish males and their ranks are growing by 1,500 lawyers every year.


Seventy-one percent of the lawyers work for 4,500 different firms. Eight percent work for the prosecutor's office or serve as in-house counsel at companies or for municipalities. Twenty-one percent work in non-legal fields but still maintain their legal licenses.

Repost from: Isremploy: Practicing Law in Israel

Israemploy - Practicing Law in Israel: by Minna Ferziger Felig- Legal Recruiter
"For olim, making aliyah and living the Zionist dream sometimes clouds the reality that once you land in Israel most of you will need to work. Finding a job is a necessity. The most obvious place to look for a job is in the field that you practiced abroad. If you were a lawyer before and you want to continue practicing law – you can practice here either in a law firm or as a legal advisor in a company or a government office.


Besides practicing as a lawyer, there are other jobs in the market that may touch on the law but don’t require a law license such as patent attorneys, IP management, legal secretaries and paralegals. However, for the purpose of this article I have limited myself to jobs that require a legal education and a law license.


Practicing law in Israel can be similar to your practice abroad. But depending on your area of expertise, it can also be very different. Even if you end up practicing in nearly the same field that you did abroad, however, there are many practical and cultural differences that are important to know before making the transition."

"We want to change the economic system from neo-liberal to a welfare state."

The Jerusalem Post had an article today about the economic protests going on in Israel for the past few weeks. Economist to protesters: 'We don’t live in a magic world'.

Sunday is Not a Day Off!

The JPost reported, here, that support is growing to make Sunday part of the weekend. To compensate for the lost time work people will have to work longer hours during the week.

Personally, [I think] I am opposed to the idea. I don't know how long other people are working now but I already work until 7 PM. If Sunday becomes part of the weekend and the other workdays get longer that would make my day even longer. The other option is to make Friday, currently a day off for many people, into a part-time workday. Since the Sabbath starts at sundown, even people who work on Friday only work half a day. So we'd have Sunday off but work longer hours M-Th and half a day Friday. No thanks.

If the goal of this plan is to create a four day work week, I think I could support it. Lawyers probably work at least 50 hours a week now. If the plan is to cut that down, what's to be against. However, for certain fields like law, the new regime might have little to no effect. In a business like law, clients' demands directly impact the hours the lawyers work. So absent a change in clients' expectations, lawyers will have to work the same amount. Furthermore, if work must get done over the weekend, for Sabbath observant people, it will have to be done on Sunday. It is very demoralizing to be working alone in an empty office on the weekend.

For kids who are in school Sunday through Friday, if Sunday becomes part of the weekend and teachers are off then we will have one day less instruction for children but one more day for family bonding. But if the parents need to work on Sunday they will need to make child care arrangements in lieu of school. Maybe I wouldn't mind having Sunday off if the teachers didn't!

There are other implications to this plan.

Mandatory High School Education Law Expanded

Yesterday's post was about American Jews making aliyah for the cheap Jewish education they can get here in Israel. Today, I am continuing on the school theme.

The Israeli Knesset recently expanded the Mandatory Education Law so that now education is mandatory for all children through the 12th grade. Schools may not expel students unless they have a replacement education facility for them. The old law mandated education only through the 10th grade. Parents must ensure that their kids attend school and schools must provide education for all children through the 12th grade.

I must admit I don't fully understand the logic of mandating a high school education for every student. First of all, what if a student is disruptive? According to the law, the school may not expel him unless there is an alternative school for him to attend. Clearly, no other school will be willing to take him, so the first school must keep him and do what exactly? Secondly, I am generally opposed to any law, ordinance, or social pressure that expects everybody to do the exact same thing. I don't think that every child is necessarily cut out for school. Most schools involve sitting at a desk for many hours and passively receiving information. A mandatory education law assumes that every child is physically, psychologically, and emotionally prepared to do that. I, however, assume the opposite. I think that the schools as we have them today are a relatively new thing in human history and to expect every student to be capable of attending through the age 18 is asking a lot. Third, I'm not sure why the law needs to demand that parents send their kids to school. I would think that most parents don't need to be told that their kids must go to school- they want them to get an education. I think that Israel probably has one of the highest literacy rates in the world. (According to Wikipedia it's 97.1%) And what if a parent decides that his/her child is best served by leaving school and pursuing some kind of career? Shouldn't there be more room for parents to decide what is in the best interests of their children?

The answer to these questions is that presumably, the society has decided that we will all be better off if everyone has at least a high school education (assuming that all who attend high school get a high school education.) Israel has had a long history of compulsory education, see the Wikipedia entry on "Compulsory Education," here:

Although Plato's The Republic is credited with having popularized the concept of compulsory education in Western intellectual thought, every parent in Judea since Moses's Covenant with God nearly a thousand years prior was required to teach their children at least informally. Over the centuries, as cities, towns and villages developed, a class of teachers called Rabbis evolved. According to the Talmud (tractate Bava Bathra 21a) which praises a sage Joshua ben Gamla with the institution of formal Jewish education in the 1st century AD., Ben Gamla instituted schools in every town and made formal education compulsory from the age of 6 or 7.

But I still think there is a difference between the Torah's obligation to teach one's child and the mandatory high school education for every child. I think the Torah's obligation leaves more flexibility for each parent to decide what is best for his child. Which, I might add, is why I think it is very important for governments to fund different types of schools with different education methods to educate all children, who do not all learn the same way.

For a blog post on the obsolescence of public school education in America see here. For a paper entitled Mass Secondary Schooling And The State: The Role Of State Compulsion In The High School Movement, by Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz, see here.

From US to Israel for Jewish education - Israel Jewish Scene, Ynetnews

I am officially famous.

I spoke with a reporter on the flight to Israel a few weeks ago when we made aliyah about our reasons for doing so and the article was just published in the English section of Ynet, here. The article was about people making aliyah to avoid the high cost of Jewish education in the U.S. While that wasn't our motivation, it definitely is a nice benefit.

It is interesting, however, to see the debate raging in the comments section with some people accusing the new olim of coming here to take advantage of the free tuition at the expense of the taxpayers. I think they overlook the fact that these new olim constitute a new segment of the tax base and will contribute just as much as the native citizens of Israel (who have been here, for the most part, for all of about 80 years.)

Haifa District Court Judge Refuses Testimony of Reincarnated Man

Arutz Sheva (Channel 7) reported today that in the Haifa District Court a judge ruled that the estate of the decedent, a man who attacked Israeli soldiers with an ax, could not submit the affidavit of a 7-year-old boy who the estate claimed was really the reincarnated soul of the decedent. The judge politely said that the rules of evidence in a court of law are not the same as in the religious sphere and therefore the testimony was inadmissible. The family wanted to use the boy's testimony to show that the decedent did not commit the attack in which he was subsequently killed. See story here.


Apparently, not all courts are so strict. In a law review article from the University of Nebraska (John W. Strong, Consensual Modifications of the Rules of Evidence: The Limits of Party Autonomy in an Adversary System, 80 Neb. L. Rev. 159, 162 (2001)) I found the following description of a case in Arizona (Plaintiff's Petition for Special Action, Church of Immortal Consciousness v. Superior Court, Arizona Court of Appeals, Division 2, No. 2 CA-SA 94-0118) where:

a group holding some rather unusual beliefs brought suit for defamation against the defendant for publicly saying that the members of the group were “devil worshipers.” Apparently, in an effort to prove that the tenets of the group did not include devil worshiping, the plaintiffs proposed to call the founder of the group as an expert witness on the group's beliefs. This course of action presented certain logistical problems since the proposed witness had been deceased since the 15th century, and would testify, if permitted, by speaking through one of the current leaders. Not surprisingly, the defendant did not raise any objection.

The trial judge's reaction, however, was in my opinion entirely correct. After an initial period of disbelief that the plaintiffs were offering the testimony of a spirit, the judge refused to allow such a proceeding. Unfortunately, this was not the end of the matter, as the plaintiff filed a special action in the appellate court and learned briefs were prepared on the question of whether spirits can qualify as competent witnesses, lay or expert, under the Arizona Rules of Evidence.

And, ultimately, the case cannot be said to represent a vindication of the principle of judicial rationality. Upon the return of the action to the trial court, and its trial before a different judge, the spirit was allowed to testify. Following the testimony, and the settlement of the case, one local attorney was quoted as observing, “this sends a very strange message to people.” (Whitehouse, Spirit Testimony Raises Legal Questions, Payson Arizona Roundup, July 28, 1995, at 1.)

This is reminiscent of a story in the JPost earlier in the week about the government's Anti-Witchcraft Unit in Saudi Arabia. In one case apparently, a judge accused of bribery claimed he had been bewitched and committed the acts while under a spell.

"In accordance with our Islamic tradition we believe that magic really exists," Abdullah Jaber, a political cartoonist at the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah, told The Media Line. "The fact that an official body, subordinate to the Saudi Ministry of Interior, has a unit to combat sorcery proves that the government recognizes this, like Muslims worldwide."

Obviously the problem with these types of claims is that they are invariably hard to proof or disprove. A person can claim he was bewitched and who is to say differently.

This reminds me of something I read by Aldous Huxley in his Brave New World Revisited:

An ethical system that is based upon a fairly realis­tic appraisal of the data of experience is likely to do more good than harm. But many ethical systems have been based upon an appraisal of experience, a view of the nature of things, that is hopelessly unrealistic. Such an ethic is likely to do more harm than good. Thus, until quite recent times, it was universally be­lieved that bad weather, diseases of cattle and sexual impotence could be, and in many cases actually were, caused by the malevolent operations of magicians. To catch and kill magicians was therefore a duty -- and this duty, moreover, had been divinely ordained in the second Book of Moses: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." The systems of ethics and law that were based upon this erroneous view of the nature of things were the cause (during the centuries, when they were taken most seriously by men in authority) of the most appall­ing evils. The orgy of spying, lynching and judicial murder, which these wrong views about magic made logical and mandatory, was not matched until our own days, when the Communist ethic, based upon erro­neous views about economics, and the Nazi ethic, based upon erroneous views about race, commanded and justified atrocities on an even greater scale. 

In Jewish law, I'm not sure this reincarnation testimony would fly. First of all, written testimony is generally not allowed in Jewish law. Second, the testimony of a male below the age of 13 is generally not accepted. Third, even religious authorities are not (generally) going to believe the testimony of a person who claims they are the re-incarnated soul of the plaintiff, at least not without some stiff cross-examination.

See after the jump for my translation of the Haifa Court's decision and the original Hebrew version.

Mandatory Vaccinations in Israel

Two days ago I wrote about the legality of mandating medical treatment against the patient's or guardian's will. That post led me to some material on mandatory vaccination laws.

The mandatory vaccination movement seems to have begun in England in 1853 when the government required every child to be vaccinated or the parents would have to pay a fine of £1. There was a strong public backlash (partly due to the fines) and a committee was formed to re-investigate the matter and the fine was repealed. In 2004, the British Medical Association announced that vaccination policies should be based purely on voluntary participation. For a book on this topic see Bodily Matters: The Anti-Vaccination Movement in England, 1853–1907 (Radical Perspectives) by Nadja Durbach.

Coming to- and Staying Illegally in- the Promised Land

In a column in the Jerusalem Post last week, Seth Frantzman wrote about Israel's new and lenient policy towards immigrants who give birth to children in Israel. The government policy required female foreign workers to leave the country with their babies within three months of giving birth. The workers would have been allowed to retain their work visas only if they returned to their home countries and then returned to Israel without their infants. The Supreme Court, in a decision written by outgoing Justice, Ayala Procaccia, decided recently that a female immigrant who gives birth here may not be deported because doing so would affect her "right to be a parent, to have a family and to support herself. The policy is incongruent with Israeli labor laws that safeguard the rights of the woman both during and after birth.” Frantzman argues that this policy is based on paternalistic or racist views because the government sees the East Asian or African foreign workers as incapable of making mature decisions. Thus when foreign workers come into this country with a visa and decide to remain illegally they are not treated as having made a conscious decision to break the law but as charity cases who need special protection. Frantzman writes that "By deporting foreign workers, their 'rights' to a family are not being harmed; they are merely being asked to be responsible adults, responsible toward the law and their children." The State has the right to set the rules for who can and cannot enter. When the State gives a woman a working visa, it a personal right, not a right that extends to the woman's whole family.

***UPDATE*** The decision from this case was on the Hebrew portion of the Dinei Yisrael exam yesterday, August 7, 2011.

Part of me has trouble with the whole notion of borders in the first place.

Judge Rules that Doctors May Amputate Girl's Hand to Save Her Life- Against Mother's Wishes

In a recent decision of the Tel Aviv Family Law Court, Judge Yehoram Shaked ruled that the Tel Aviv Medical Center could amputate the hand of a minor, A.M. against her mother's wishes in order to prevent the A.M.'s cancer from spreading to her lungs and giving her a 60-65% of survival. (Family Court Case T.A. 26442-04-11.) The Judge wrote that there were two questions before him: First, should A.M.'s hand be amputated? And second, and easier to decide, should we prefer life to death? When the second question is answered in the affirmative, it follows that A.M. must lose her hand to save her life. The mother of the girl said that she believed that prayer and fasting was the solution to A.M.'s medical crisis.

Guest Post: Introduction to Israel's National Insurance Program- Bituach Leumi

Recently, I was at an expo in Jerusalem for new olim where I met Ms.Yael Harari of Transhomation, a company that helps recent immigrants to Israel. They help navigate some of the bureaucratic hassles that can arise for anyone moving to a foreign country, including dealing with the Ministry of Interior, banks, finding a school for children, and buying a car.

Below is an article from Transhomation explaining Israel's National Insurance Program- Bituach Leumi with a few minor edits for clarity:

The National Insurance Institute, a.k.a. “Bituach Leumi” in Hebrew, is the governmental body responsible for collecting premiums and dispensing various insurance benefits to these entitled.

The mere mention of “Bituach Leumi” to an Israeli, often rewards one with a frustrated look or a heart stopping sigh on his/her part, as this is regarded one of the most complicated bureaucratic bodies in Israel.

In a series of short articles, we attempt to provide you with a basic understanding of the system, including some helpful tips.

Rationale

The rationale behind Bituach Leumi, is to provide means of subsistence to those who are unable to support themselves whether temporarily or permanently, while granting benefits and allowances to those who have accumulated rights (i.e. maternity leave payment, work injury compensation etc.).

The purpose is to attempt an equal distribution of the national income, so that those who are able to do so pay their insurance premiums in accordance to their financial ability, while at the same time Bituach Leumi transfers this income to those who are in financial need.

JPost: This Week in History: Jewish right to aliya becomes law

1950 Law of Return legally enshrined Jewish immigration as a legal right, recognizing that “Every Jew has the right to come to [Israel] as an oleh.”

Are There Interns in Israel?

According to the Minimum Wage Law, any worker over the age of 18 is entitled to receive the minimum wage and a part-time employee receives a pro-rata minimum wage. This right cannot be waived, so that a person cannot volunteer to work for free.

In one case, the Court rejected an employer's claim that a Chinese worker waived certain rights because the Court determined that he didn't understand the waiver agreement (he was illiterate in Chinese as well as in Hebrew.)

There is a post about a law firm that "employed" a legal intern for no pay at the IsraPay Blog. He quotes the National Labor Court as follows:

Article 12 of the minimum wage law, 1987, which is a Basic law which cannot be waived or made to be Dependent on other factors. The minimum wage law was meant to prevent employers from taking advantage of groups of workers as well as protect employees from themselves and prevent instances where an employee agrees to work for free because he is in need of a professional mentor.The court determined that even if an intern agrees to work without pay, despite this "agreement" the employer must pay the intern at least minimum wages. This despite the impression that the employer may have that the employee would be willing to work without pay. Even if the employee didn't act wholeheartedly, and even if he sued the employer after leaving his position, this cannot demeanor his rights by law.

The court further determined that in a work relationship between a mentor and an intern, the mentor will always have the upper hand. From the outset this is not an equal relationship. The intern is like a student who approaches his master, as the employer oversees his student's professional manner, guides him and needs to authorize the internship, thereby opening doors to his profession future by allowing him access to the Israeli bar association.

As such, even if the intern agrees to work without pay or for partial pay, this is interpreted as exploitation of the distress of the weak by the employer and not as an insincere action by the employee.

Furthermore, and on the other hand it would be insincere action on the part of the employer to imply or suggest that an employee work for free or at a reduced rate and even if he were presented with such a suggestion from the employee, he should turn it down completely.

It is a given that the wording of the law will not accept a "waiver" of basic employee rights, as minimum wage, even if implied, suggested or agreed upon. It has no consequence whether it is an oral or written agreement or even an understanding or implication because the employee didn't complain about not receiving pay or receiving less than minimum wages.

It also does not matter whether this was done before, during or after employment.

The court rejected the appeal and charged the employer with the court fees as well.

According to the Labor Law website Ovdim here and here, some of the factors that imply that a worker is a "volunteer" include: